Functional road hierarchies

CIV4284
Dr Susilawati & Brendan Pender

MONASH INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORT STUDIES

Learning outcomes

 Recognise the major functions of roads

 Understand the traditional ways roads are classified and
the limitations of these methods
 Understand the relationship between road function and
road design

2 MONASH INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORT STUDIES2

Traditionally, roads have two major functions

Movement Access

3 MONASH INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORT STUDIES3

Amenity / place function is emerging as a ‘third function’

Movement function = Place function =

passing time spending time

Source: brisbanetimes.com.au
Source: Marshall White

4 MONASH INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORT STUDIES

Conventional road hierarchies

 Roads are classified based on their movement vs. access

function
– Freeway Conventional representation of road hierarchy
– Highway
– Arterial
– Collector
– Local street

5 MONASH INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORT STUDIES5

What does this look like in practice?

 Freeway
 Highway
 Arterial
 Collector
 Local street

See Topic 3 for more design characteristics

6 MONASH INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORT STUDIES6

Much conflict in middle-order roads

 The movement and access

functions of roads is a conflict,
not a balance Conventional representation of road hierarchy

 Much conflict between movement

and access in ‘middle order’
roads

7 MONASH INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORT STUDIES7

A ‘separate functions’ model provides a simplified view of classification

 Separate the functions by acknowledging two different kinds of

road:
1. Access streets
2. Movement roads
 Give clear priority of one function over the other to minimise
conflict

8 MONASH INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORT STUDIES8

Problems with conventional road hierarchies (1)

 Designed in a time with

relatively simple home-to-
work road travel
– Travel is now more complex

9 MONASH INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORT STUDIES9

Problems with conventional road hierarchies (2)

 Hard to apply hierarchy to

existing networks
– Can ‘inherit’ problems with road
design
– Road use changes over time

10 MONASH INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORT STUDIES10

 Problems with conventional road hierarchies (3)

 Very ‘car-centric’
perspective
– Roads go from ‘more/faster
cars’ to ‘fewer/slower cars’
– How do you manage different
modes? How gets priority of
movement?

11 MONASH INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORT STUDIES11

Problems with conventional road hierarchies (4)

 Little consideration for the ‘place’ or amenity function of

roads
– Amenity is not synonymous with access
– Access can compliment amenity (e.g. good pedestrian access)
– Access can reduce amenity (e.g. truck loading, excess car
parking)

12 MONASH INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORT STUDIES

Managing arterials has become much more complex

 Access / amenity / economic function becoming increasingly

important
 Often balancing multiple modes (car, bus, tram, cycling, deliveries)

Bridge Road, Richmond

13 MONASH INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORT STUDIES13

Modern hierarchies manage the conflict through further complication, not simplification

 Accept, manage and attempt to minimise the conflict

 Attempt to balance the needs of all users (not just cars),
pedestrians and land uses
 Amenity (‘place’) function taking greater priority in some areas
VicRoads Smartroads hierarchy
Link & Place classification matrix

14 MONASH INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORT STUDIES14

How does road classification relate
to design?

CIV5302
Dr Alexa Delbosc

MONASH INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORT STUDIES

Road hierarchies are usually paired with descriptions of their use, e.g.

Strategic Primary Secondary

Criteria Motorway arterial arterial arterial Collector Local
Lanes 4 to 8 2 to 6 2 to 6 2 to 4 2 to 4 2
Daily traffic Generally 40,000 + Generally 40,000 + May exceed Up to 25,000 Up to 10,000 Up to 5,000
volumes 40,000
Speeds High Moderate to high Generally Generally moderate Generally moderate Generally moderate
moderate to low
Through traffic Greatest through Predominately Predominately Movement within Collect traffic from Primary role is
function movement through traffic (may through traffic districts local streets to access
serve land uses) (may serve land arterials
uses)

Public transport No stops provided; May include bus May include bus May include bus Less significant Limited passenger
buses may travel priority and passenger priority and priority and passenger facilities facilities
along shoulders facilities passenger passenger facilities
facilities

Access No access to adjoining Very limited access to Access limited or Access limited or Some access to land Significant access to
land adjoining land controlled controlled uses properties

Parking No parking Generally no parking Controlled Parking Controlled Parking Parking controlled Parking controlled
where appropriate where appropriate

Road classification from Auckland Transport 2014

16 MONASH INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORT STUDIES16

So there is a common assumption that “road type” corresponds to given traffic volume
and design characteristics

TRAFFIC VOLUME

DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS ROAD TYPE

SERVICE TO ABUTTING LAND

17 MONASH INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORT STUDIES17

Experienced engineers do need to know the design characteristics of road types (see
Topic 2b)

Typical local street Typical arterial

18 MONASH INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORT STUDIES

But roads should be classified based on intended function, not just existing design or
use

 Classifying based only on use has

issues
– This may not be the most efficient or
safest use (e.g. ‘rat-running’ through
local streets)

www.dailytelegraph.com

19 MONASH INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORT STUDIES

BUT actual use of a road must be understood and acknowledged

Shopping street, Shanghai

University precinct, Shanghai

20 MONASH INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORT STUDIES